I really dont want to watch suckitude again. If we do lose we simply flip him at the deadline but can we try to win first? You only tank if you are truly losing from day 1. If after 20 games you are 4-16--then yes tank. But why tank from game 1?
Why not use a restricted #1 to lottery--we could simply get it back at the deadline if we stink?
BRIGGS wrote:I really dont want to watch suckitude again. If we do lose we simply flip him at the deadline but can we try to win first? You only tank if you are truly losing from day 1. If after 20 games you are 4-16--then yes tank. But why tank from game 1?Why not use a restricted #1 to lottery--we could simply get it back at the deadline if we stink?
but if we win 2 games in the last week that cost us a spot or two you will cry about not enough suckitude.
Sorry but if there are no young players worth adding to the long term mix you dont add. Bledsoe doesnt move the needle enough. I would rather draft 1-5 than 6-12 which is about what Bledsoe probably nets us at this point
BRIGGS wrote:I really dont want to watch suckitude again. If we do lose we simply flip him at the deadline but can we try to win first? You only tank if you are truly losing from day 1. If after 20 games you are 4-16--then yes tank. But why tank from game 1?Why not use a restricted #1 to lottery--we could simply get it back at the deadline if we stink?
Its one thing to pick a player out a random and fixating on a trade materializing for him, but you aren't communicating with the Knicks front office here.
Why keep hitting a handful of fans who also don't communicate with the Knicks front office with the same fantasy over and over and over again?
Knickoftime wrote:BRIGGS wrote:I really dont want to watch suckitude again. If we do lose we simply flip him at the deadline but can we try to win first? You only tank if you are truly losing from day 1. If after 20 games you are 4-16--then yes tank. But why tank from game 1?Why not use a restricted #1 to lottery--we could simply get it back at the deadline if we stink?
Its one thing to pick a player out a random and fixating on a trade materializing for him, but you aren't communicating with the Knicks front office here.
Why keep hitting a handful of fans who also don't communicate with the Knicks front office with the same fantasy over and over and over again?
Because it makes sense?
Bledsoe erratic Games Played per season. Appears he can't put two straight healthy years.
Good player. Seems like the kind of deal we made in the past and give up a first round pick.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play...
this is why NY cant rebuild....they try to do it and then the fans complain..
its been 16 years of suckitude already..lets deal with it for one more year. Make moves for space and picks until next June you have cap space and a top pick.
WE have Randle, Baker and Frank. SIgn a cheap vet and run with it....no trades to try to WIN this year..
BRIGGS wrote:Knickoftime wrote:BRIGGS wrote:I really dont want to watch suckitude again. If we do lose we simply flip him at the deadline but can we try to win first? You only tank if you are truly losing from day 1. If after 20 games you are 4-16--then yes tank. But why tank from game 1?Why not use a restricted #1 to lottery--we could simply get it back at the deadline if we stink?
Its one thing to pick a player out a random and fixating on a trade materializing for him, but you aren't communicating with the Knicks front office here.
Why keep hitting a handful of fans who also don't communicate with the Knicks front office with the same fantasy over and over and over again?
Because it makes sense?
That's good and fine you think so, but you've already mentioned numerous times now. If it makes sense it made sense the first time. Why keep repeating it?
We must tank, it is the only way
BRIGGS wrote:Why not use a restricted #1 to lottery--we could simply get it back at the deadline if we stink?
No. We have been down this road for decades and all it has given us is losing. Insanity - doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. No more pick trades for meh vets.
How about just developing two guards we have in Ron Baker (1 year experience) and Frank Ntilikina (youngest player in league)
Give them some time, a year and see what they can do.
This Bledsoe dude on Phoenix is so trash.
so this is the 4th thread about obtaining bledsoe? we get it, you want him. the forum does not need 4 threads about it, just because you want it.
stanleybostitch wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Why not use a restricted #1 to lottery--we could simply get it back at the deadline if we stink?
No. We have been down this road for decades and all it has given us is losing. Insanity - doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. No more pick trades for meh vets.
Whay he said, beat me to it
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:this is why NY cant rebuild....they try to do it and then the fans complain..its been 16 years of suckitude already..lets deal with it for one more year. Make moves for space and picks until next June you have cap space and a top pick.
WE have Randle, Baker and Frank. SIgn a cheap vet and run with it....no trades to try to WIN this year..
Yep I want full tankage from the start of the season onwards- none of our initial 50 50 record that then falls apart but stops us landing a top 3
BRIGGS wrote:Knickoftime wrote:BRIGGS wrote:I really dont want to watch suckitude again. If we do lose we simply flip him at the deadline but can we try to win first? You only tank if you are truly losing from day 1. If after 20 games you are 4-16--then yes tank. But why tank from game 1?Why not use a restricted #1 to lottery--we could simply get it back at the deadline if we stink?
Its one thing to pick a player out a random and fixating on a trade materializing for him, but you aren't communicating with the Knicks front office here.
Why keep hitting a handful of fans who also don't communicate with the Knicks front office with the same fantasy over and over and over again?
Because it makes sense?
It makes literally zero sense.
Zero sense.
Zero.
Sense.
Bledsoe's remaining deal is about 15 million a year for this year and next. That's a massive bargain given the money getting thrown out in FA this offseason.
Behind Bledsoe is Tyler Ulis ( basically a rookie, raw and unproven) and Brandon Knight ( Ugh...) on a truly ugly contract, coming off his worst year ever as a pro.
You have Josh Jackson incoming, who clearly needs a stable hand and a stable organization to keep him in check. You have young guys like Chriss, Bender and Booker who need veteran leadership around them.
You never look at the perspective of the non Knicks team. You just don't care. What the other team needs or trying to do or what makes sense for their future and goals and circumstances, you just don't give a damn.
TripleThreat wrote:BRIGGS wrote:Knickoftime wrote:BRIGGS wrote:I really dont want to watch suckitude again. If we do lose we simply flip him at the deadline but can we try to win first? You only tank if you are truly losing from day 1. If after 20 games you are 4-16--then yes tank. But why tank from game 1?Why not use a restricted #1 to lottery--we could simply get it back at the deadline if we stink?
Its one thing to pick a player out a random and fixating on a trade materializing for him, but you aren't communicating with the Knicks front office here.
Why keep hitting a handful of fans who also don't communicate with the Knicks front office with the same fantasy over and over and over again?
Because it makes sense?
It makes literally zero sense.
Zero sense.
Zero.
Sense.
Bledsoe's remaining deal is about 15 million a year for this year and next. That's a massive bargain given the money getting thrown out in FA this offseason.
Behind Bledsoe is Tyler Ulis ( basically a rookie, raw and unproven) and Brandon Knight ( Ugh...) on a truly ugly contract, coming off his worst year ever as a pro.
You have Josh Jackson incoming, who clearly needs a stable hand and a stable organization to keep him in check. You have young guys like Chriss, Bender and Booker who need veteran leadership around them.
You never look at the perspective of the non Knicks team. You just don't care. What the other team needs or trying to do or what makes sense for their future and goals and circumstances, you just don't give a damn.
You have that wrong. They want to get rid of one of Knight or Bledsoe and let Ulis start. The market for Bledsoe would be a player and a restricted #1--thts his value. He would give us more of a chance to play with Frank and Baker. I dont think Rondo is a good choice. Im not concerned with lottery restricted 1s
In Briggs I trust. I checked some of his past highlights, he has OK court vision, plays under control, and can penetrate and score. Also has a 6'6" wingspan. How's his defense? Highlights don't really focus on D.
Bledsoe's a good player when healthy. That's the plus. The minus is he misses a lot of games due to injury. His salary is more than fair considering both of those things. I wouldn't give up a first round pick since we're not going to contend this year or next regardless. I would trade Lee + Lance or O'Quinn which should work. Phoenix probably won't go for it, but they do want to get the top pick next year and this would help them. This could get us into the playoffs and give Frank a chance to learn from a real point guard.
knickstorrents wrote:In Briggs I trust. I checked some of his past highlights, he has OK court vision, plays under control, and can penetrate and score. Also has a 6'6" wingspan. How's his defense? Highlights don't really focus on D.
It's not about the player though which i can't believe some of you still don't get, it's about the rebuild and bringing on Bledsoe will win us more games but it won't be enough to matter and will hurt our rebuild by not only having to give up valuable assets that we don't have much of at all and will also hurt us in next years draft where we need as high a pick as possible. Bledsoe the player is fine and i'd love to have him if we were a team ready to compete for a playoff run and more but we're not and the guy has a huge injury history as well. It's not the right time to be trading for players and it's just Briggs being impatient and having impatience right now is exactly what we don't need.
newyorker4ever wrote:knickstorrents wrote:In Briggs I trust. I checked some of his past highlights, he has OK court vision, plays under control, and can penetrate and score. Also has a 6'6" wingspan. How's his defense? Highlights don't really focus on D.
It's not about the player though which i can't believe some of you still don't get, it's about the rebuild and bringing on Bledsoe will win us more games but it won't be enough to matter and will hurt our rebuild by not only having to give up valuable assets that we don't have much of at all and will also hurt us in next years draft where we need as high a pick as possible. Bledsoe the player is fine and i'd love to have him if we were a team ready to compete for a playoff run and more but we're not and the guy has a huge injury history as well. It's not the right time to be trading for players and it's just Briggs being impatient and having impatience right now is exactly what we don't need.
I dont want to concede to rebuild.
If we got a really good PG--and Bledsoe has never been with players like Carmelo and KP--this guy could be a star. He could UP his game. Why would using a top 14 restricted pick and Kuz be a bad deal? Im not worried about lotto restricted picks --if they convey--we made the playoffs. Bledsoe is 27 hes no Marbury hes a two way player
People are not thinking this through
IF IF we can add players like Bledsoe Smart Faried and Barton--we have the cogs upfront Willy Oquinn KP Melo--we could be a very good club. Id rather go there than HOPE that we stink to get pick 6 again.
That would also give us two players who are good friends with LBJ
Reasonably good player. Excels at the volume stats that GMs stopped emphasizing a long time ago. Probably gives $15 mil worth of production and is paid $15 mil. Either we keep him for 1 1/2 years or badly overpay him as he hits the downward part of his career.
